Who Teaches This? You May Be Surprised!

Read the following and see if you can guess who teaches this (hints: He is a best-selling author; this man is a well-known scientist who claims to be an “evangelical Christian”; he was a keynote speaker at the U.S. National Prayer Breakfast in 2007):

Belief in a supernatural creator always leaves open the possibility that human beings are a fully-intended part of creation. If the Creator chooses to interact with creation, he could very well influence the evolutionary process to ensure the arrival of his intended result . . . . Furthermore, an omniscient creator could easily create the universe in such a way that physical and natural laws would result in human evolution . . . .

God planned for humans to evolve to the point of attaining these characteristics . . . . For example, in order to reflect God’s Image by engaging in meaningful relationships, the human brain had to evolve to the point where an understanding of love and relationship could be grasped and lived out. God’s intention for humans to have relationships is illustrated in the opening chapters of Genesis, where many fundamental truths about God and humankind are communicated through the imagery of a creation story. After placing Adam in the Garden of Eden, Genesis 2 describes God’s decision to provide Adam with a partner . . . . The Image of God also includes moral consciousness and responsibility. Humans did not have a fully formed moral consciousness prior to the time of Adam and Eve . . . . However, general consciousness must have already evolved so that a moral consciousness and the associated responsibility were possible . . . . When Adam and Eve received God’s image, they had evolved to where they could understand the difference between right and wrong. It seems that Adam and Eve first demonstrated their new moral prowess when, using their free will, they chose wrong by eating from the forbidden tree of knowledge of good and evil. Adam and Eve then knew the difference between right and wrong in a more personal way than before, having experienced the guilt and shame that accompanied their decision (see Genesis 3:1-13) . . . . When Did Humans Receive the Image of God? . . .

We cannot know the exact time that humans attained God’s image. In fact, it may be that the image of God emerged gradually over a period of time. Estimates of the historical time of Adam and Eve are varied . . . . While some literalist interpreters of Genesis argue that God created Adam and Eve in their present form, the evidence of DNA and the fossil record establishes that humans were also participants in the long evolutionary continuum, and God used this process as his means of creation . . . .

We also do not know if humanity received the image of God by the immediate onset of a relationship with God or by a slower evolutionary process. In either case, this development occurred before the fall of Adam and Eve, since moral responsibility and a broken relationship with God are both involved in the story of the fall. Perhaps God used the evolutionary process to equip humankind with language, free will and culture, and then revealed God’s will to individuals or a community so that they might then enter into meaningful relationship with God through obedience, prayer and worship. In this scenario, the evolutionary process is necessary but not sufficient to encompass the biblical teaching on the image of God . . . .

The person who teaches this is Dr. Francis Collins, the scientist well known for his leadership in the Human Genome project. Dr. Collins is a member of the BioLogos team, which is described on their website as:

. . . a team of believing scientists who are committed to promoting a perspective of both theological and scientific soundness, which takes seriously the claims of theism and of evolution, and finds compelling evidence for their compatibility.

The BioLogos website received a grant from the liberal (though relatively morally conservative) John Templeton Foundation (by the way, such a foundation would never support an organization like Answers in Genesis that stands uncompromisingly on the authority of God’s Word). The above quotes come from the BioLogos.org website.

An article in Time magazine about Collins and this new website said that Collins received many emails after the publication of his book about the human genome project (and his belief in evolution) asking numerous questions—many about Genesis—the same sorts of questions we receive at Answers in Genesis. Sadly, Collins and his group are destructive to biblical authority and are leading so many people astray. The Time magazine article stated:

After his best-selling The Language of God came out three years ago, Collins began receiving thousands of e-mails—primarily from other Evangelicals—asking questions about how to reconcile scriptural teachings with scientific evidence.

“Many of these Christians have been taught that evolution is wrong,” Collins explains. “They go to college and get exposed to data, and then they’re thrust into personal crises of great intensity. If the church was wrong about the origins of life, was it wrong about everything? Some of them walk away from science or faith—or both.”

Actually we find exactly the opposite. It is compromisers like Colllins who cause people to doubt and disbelieve the Bible—causing them to walk away from the church. In fact, in a new book to be released in three weeks (entitled: Already Gone), we report on well documented research that confirms this.

The Time magazine article continues:

Collins . . . decided to gather a group of theologians and scientists to create the BioLogos Foundation in order to foster dialogue between the two sides. The name—combining bios (Greek for “life”) and logos (“the word”)—is also what Collins calls his blended theory of evolution and creation, an approach he hopes can replace intelligent design, which he derides as “not a scientific proposal” and “not good theology either.”

. . . As he read through the thousands of e-mails he received from readers of his book, the former NIH scientist noticed that there were 25 or so common questions that his mostly Evangelical correspondents raised. How should Christians respond to Darwin? If God created the universe, who or what created God? Does believing in science mean one can’t believe in miracles? What is up with Noah’s Ark and the flood? The new website offers answers to these vexing questions and, through those responses lays out the BioLogos theory that God chose to create the world by way of evolution.

It is so sad to note that according to Time magazine, “Collins plans to build on that work by developing a home-schooling curriculum that can serve as an alternative to the literalist creationism materials widely used by many conservative Evangelical parents.” If the home schooling movement adopts such a curriculum, they will certainly lose the next generation they are attempting to train up for the Lord.

It is also no surprise that as the Time magazine article states:

A large slice of the questions deal with Genesis, the first book in both Christian and Jewish Scriptures, and the text that explains the creation and population of Earth, and well as the relationship between God and man. Some answers are straightforward, as with the mystery of where Cain's wife came from. “The scientific evidence suggests a dramatically larger population at this point in history,” conclude Collins . . . .

It is true that in this era of history, people are asking questions about Genesis, as they recognize that if Genesis is not true, how can one trust any of God’s Word? Collins is offering them answers that will only further undermine biblical authority—AiG is giving answers that stand on biblical authority, and, as a result, so many have testified they became Christians or rededicated their lives.

AiG stands unapologetically on the authority of the Word of God. How we need to pray that Collins and his group will repent of their compromise and return to biblical authority. They honor man’s fallible ideas instead of God’s infallible Word.

The Time magazine article can be found at:

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1895284,00.html

As we have often said over the years, the compromising Christians are much more of a problem in the culture than the atheists. No wonder the church is in big trouble in this nation.

Devotion

Not ashamed to be called their God

(Hebrews 11:16) But now they desire a better country, that is, an heavenly: wherefore God is not ashamed to be called their God: for he hath prepared for them a city.

Having the reputation as being a Christian, we are concerned that nothing we do should ever make the Lord Jesus Christ be ashamed to be called our God.